Just in Time Teaching - A 21st Century Learning Technique - COLTT 2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Just in Time Teaching - A 21st Century Learning Technique - COLTT 2013

on

  • 410 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
410
Views on SlideShare
410
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • “Learning technologies should be designed to increase, and not to reduce, the amount of personal contact between students and faculty on intellectual issues.”Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in American Higher Education, 1984
  • Bombarded:hybrid courses, brain-based learning, blended courses, technology in the classroom, learner-centered teaching, etc.Focus and attentionNo such thing as multitasking, etc.Using emotions appropriatelyA little anxiety is good, a bit more is bad, etc.
  • About ~20 years ago, physics teachers began treating education as a research topic!Their findings were pretty grim"But the students do fine on my exams!“It appeared that students had been engaging in “surface learning” allowing them to solve problems algorithmically without actually understanding the concepts.
  • Was this just at Harvard (silly question)!Data from H.S., 2-year, 4-year, universities, etc.0.23 Hake gain on the FCI means that of the newtonian physics they could have learned in physics class, they learned 23% of it.Conclusion: Traditional physics lectures are all similarly (in)effective in improving conceptual understanding.
  • Enter Physics Education Research:An effort to find empirically tested ways to improve the situation.
  • Jeff’s results: Depending on the class 60-80% of my students do their WarmUps, self-reporting that they spend ~40 minutes reading/responding (very consistent average)
  • Questions are about NEW material
  • Results for time-spent question: A pretty steady average of ~40 minutes across many courses/levels/cohorts
  • Misconceptions, good efforts, superior explanations, metacognition, etc.Incorrect or incomplete responses are often particularly useful for classroom discussion.
  • Regarding clarifying of standards: Allows us to show model responses that are not teacher-generated.
  • Is this just about new energy being put into an old class?(This is a difficult confounding factor in assessing new teaching techniques.)

Just in Time Teaching - A 21st Century Learning Technique - COLTT 2013 Just in Time Teaching - A 21st Century Learning Technique - COLTT 2013 Presentation Transcript

  • Name School Department JUST IN TIME TEACHING A 21ST CENTURY LEARNING TECHNIQUE DR. JEFF LOATS DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS @ COLTT 2013
  • THE EVIDENCE STANDARD 2 Teachers can feel bombarded… I strive to be a scholarly teacher … Common (evidence-based) themes: • Focus and attention • Using emotions appropriately • Repetition and practice • Feedback
  • In your teaching do you have a method for holding students accountable for preparing for class? Previous iClicker poll results (compiled): ~24% → I don’t, but I ask/threaten really well. ~44% → I use a paper method (quiz, journal…) ~7% → I use a digital method (clickers, etc.) ~7% → I use Just inTimeTeaching. ~17% → I have some other method. 3
  • OVERVIEW 4 1. Motivation for change 2. Basics of Just inTimeTeaching 3. Mock example 4. Evidence for effectiveness 5. Summaries
  • PHYSICS EDUCATION REVOLUTION Eric Mazur, Physicist at Harvard: 5
  • 6 “ALL SIMILARLY (IN)EFFECTIVE…”
  • 7 University of Washington CU Boulder University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • FEEDBACK THAT WORKS 8 “Improvement of performance is actually a function of two perceptual processes.The individual’s perception of the standards of performance, and her/his perception of his/her own performance.” The Feedback Fallacy – Steve Falkenberg (via Linda Nilson)
  • TECHNIQUE &TECHNOLOGY 9 Technique: Just inTimeTeaching Technology: Online question & response tools Learner Teacher
  • JUST IN TIME TEACHING Online pre-class assignments (“WarmUps”) First half: • Conceptual questions, answered in sentences • Graded on thoughtful effort Second half: • Responses are read “just in time” • Instructor modifies the plan accordingly • Aggregate and individual (anonymous) responses are displayed in class. Learner Teacher 10
  • JUST IN TIME TEACHING A different student role: • Actively prepare for class (not just reading/watching) • Actively engage in class • Compare your progress & plan accordingly A different instructor role: • Actively prepare for class with you (not just going over last year’s notes ) • Modify class accordingly • Create interactive engagement opportunities Learner Teacher 11
  • 24% 36% 24% 11% 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 0-20% 20-40% 40-60% 60-80% 80-100% Consider a typical day in your class.What fraction of students did their preparatory work before coming to class? Previous iClicker poll results (compiled): 12 N = 73
  • WARMUP QUESTIONS 13 • Every-day language • Occasional simple comprehension question • Mostly higher level questions (a la Bloom) • Perhaps any question is better than none Connections to evidence: –Pre-class work reduces working memory load during class. –Multimodal practice (not learning styles): JiTT brings reading, writing and discussion as modes of practice.
  • METACOGNITION 14 Two questions in everyWarmUp: First: “What aspect of the material did you find the most difficult or interesting.” Last: “How much time did you spend on the pre- class work for tomorrow?” Connections to evidence: –Forced practice at metacognition: Students regularly evaluate their own interaction with the material.
  • CLOSING THE LOOP 15 Student responses: • Graded on thoughtful effort • Sampled and categorized for display • Quoted anonymously Closing the loop: • Respond to some students digitally • Class time shifts to active engagement.
  • EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK 16 Faulkenberg’s criteria for feedback: • Feedback doesn’t work if students don’t correctly perceive the performance standards. • Feedback doesn’t work if students cannot correctly evaluate their own performance. JiTT feedback loop: Clarify standards in low-stakes situations. Allows students to judge whether they have correctly evaluated their own performance.
  • EXAMPLE:WHIRLING BUCKET 17 A bucket of water can be whirled in a vertical circle without the water falling out, even at the top of the circle when the bucket is upside down. Explain… ~15% → An outward force holds it in ~30% → An inward force holds it in ~20% → Talked (correctly!) about acceleration & velocity… but didn't really answer. ~10% → Nailed it! (or close enough)
  • EXAMPLE:WHIRLING BUCKET 18 “The water doesn't come out because you twirling the bucket is applying the force of spinning, and the water just kind of counteracts that motion.” “Because the water naturally wants to keep traveling in the same direction its being whirled around in the water attempts to continue going up in a straight line but the bottom of the bucket forces it to stay in the bucket, like when you are pushed by the door of a car while making a turn.”
  • WHAT TOOLS TO USE? 19 • CMS/LMS (Blackboard, D2L, Moodle, etc.) Ready to use, tools… imperfect awful • Free service from JiTTDL.org. Designed just for JiTT, but extra login, and the site has not been improved in ~5 years • Students email responses Easy! usually overwhelming and awful • Blogging tools (WordPress)? • New tools (TopHat, Learning Catalytics)?
  • MAZUR AFTER 1YEAR 20
  • ELSEWHERE? 21
  • STUDIED EFFECTIVENESS 22 Used at hundreds of institutions Dozens of studies/articles, in many disciplines: Bio, Art Hist., Econ., Math, Psych., Chem., etc. –Increase in content knowledge –Improved student preparation for class –Improved use of out-of-class time –Increased attendance & engagement in class –Improvement in affective measures
  • STUDENT FEEDBACK ON JITT 315 students in 7 classes over 4 terms (roughly ±6%) The WarmUps have… Agreed or Strongly Agreed …helped me to be more prepared for class than I would otherwise be. 70% …helped me to be more engaged in class than I would otherwise be. 80% …helped me to learn the material better than I otherwise would 64% …been worth the time they required to complete 57%
  • WHAT MIGHT STOPYOU? 24 In terms of the technique: Time, coverage, not doing your part, pushback… In terms of the technology: Learning curve, tech. failures, perfectionism… In any reform of your teaching: Reinventing, no support, too much at once…
  • MY SUMMARY 25 JiTT may be among the easiest research-based instructional strategies that you can consistently integrate into your teaching. From an evidence-based perspective, JiTT addresses often-neglected areas. Be prepared to find that students know less than we might hope. (Perhaps freeing?)
  • YOUR SUMMARY 26 What part of JiTT concept/process is the fuzziest for you after this talk? What is the biggest reason you might not give JiTT a try in one course next term? Contact Jeff: Jeff.Loats@gmail.com Slides: www.slideshare.net/JeffLoats I love talking and working with faculty, don’t hesitate to get in touch.
  • JITT REFERENCES & RESOURCES 27 Simkins, Scott and Maier, Mark (Eds.) (2010) Just inTimeTeaching:Across the Disciplines, Across the Academy, Stylus Publishing. Gregor M. Novak, AndrewGavrini,Wolfgang Christian, Evelyn Patterson (1999) Just-in-TimeTeaching: BlendingActive Learning with WebTechnology. Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River NJ. K.A. Marrs, and G. Novak. (2004). Just-in-TimeTeaching in Biology: Creating an Active LearnerClassroom Using the Internet. Cell Biology Education, v. 3, p. 49-61. Jay R. Howard (2004). Just-in-TimeTeaching in Sociology or How I Convinced My Students toActually Read the Assignment. Teaching Sociology,Vol. 32 (No. 4 ). pp. 385-390. Published by:American SociologicalAssociation StableURL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3649666 S. Linneman,T. Plake (2006). Searching for the Difference:A ControlledTest of Just-in-TimeTeaching for Large-Enrollment IntroductoryGeologyCourses. Journal of Geoscience Education,Vol. 54 (No. 1) StableURL:http://www.nagt.org/nagt/jge/abstracts/jan06.html#v54p18